Haemonetics vs Penumbra
HAE and PEN side by side, both in surgical, medical, and dental instruments and supplies. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HAE and PEN compare
Penumbra is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Haemonetics ($12.6B against $5.4B).
On earnings, Haemonetics is cheaper: it trades at 58.4× trailing earnings, against 80.3× for Penumbra.
Penumbra grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.0% versus 0.44% for Haemonetics).
Penumbra keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.1% compared with 7.1% at Haemonetics.
Penumbra scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 7 for Haemonetics), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | HAE | PEN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.4B | $12.6B |
| Share price | $119.65 | $318.95 |
| Change, 1 year | 142% | 36.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 60.4% | 11.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.65 | 0.87 |
| Employees | – | 4,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 58.4× (better) | 80.3× |
| P/S | 4.0× (better) | 8.1× |
| P/B | 6.5× (better) | 7.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.6× (better) | 56.8× |
| P/FCF | 18.7× (better) | 62.7× |
| FCF yield | 5.3% (better) | 1.6% |
| Fair value | $69.53 | $184.29 |
| Margin of safety | −72.1% (better) | −73.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.44% | 17.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.9% | 20.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −41.1% | −4.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −37.3% | −4.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 5.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 59.0% | 68.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 12.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 7.1% | 10.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 21.5% (better) | 12.8% |
| Return on equity | 11.2% (better) | 10.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.6% | 15.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.40 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.52 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 149× |
| Current ratio | 3.08 | 5.89 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.39 | 19.07 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 109% | 86.7% |
| Held by insiders | 1.8% | 3.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $98.8K (better) | −$11.1M |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.8% | 5.9% |
Go deeper
- HAE stock overview
- HAE income statement
- HAE valuation and score
- PEN stock overview
- PEN income statement
- PEN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.